Samuli Vahonen wrote:
It depends - I'm sure if I would shoot just birds from tripod with 400+ mm in landscape orientation and macro in landscape orientation I could mitigate A7R first curtain vibration.
However in real life >50% of my photos are in portrait orientation. On Lloyd's pages it's clearly shown issue is much much worse when camera is on portrait orientation (verified by my own tests with panohead). Also there are other factors, which cause that I can't mitigate the vibration in many situations:
a) travel or lightweight hiking ==> smaller tripod with smaller head
b) panorama head (it combines much weaker head AND portrait orientation of camera)
I don't have A7r but on my A7 tests with mechanical first curtain shutter it was obvious that Zeiss APO-Sonnar 2/135 on panorama head is not usable unless used in midday with sun is shining at full power.
Handhold situations: Also I'm slightly starting to doubt theories that 1/focal length just needs to be turned to 1/(2-3 x focal length) just because camera has 36Mpix. At same time I have enjoyed getting 1/30s sharp images with 35mm lens with A7 - something, which never was possible with 20Mpix 5DmkII while using live view (=using electronic first curtain, no mirror slap or shutter "shock"). Thou this is only with 1.4/35, using small lens like FE35 it makes camera holding so difficult that 1/60s is my limit and I have got bad images even at 1/100s since A7 is so small that it's impossible to handhold without big lens. If I enable mechanical first curtain, there is no way I get any tack sharp 1/30s images with 35mm, even at 1/50s all don't come as good as 1/30s mostly comes with EFCS.
Even with all shutter vibration related issues I'm not sure will I get "just another" A7 or A7r for 2nd FE-mount body. Idea of 36Mpix sounds so tempting. Before A7 I had Canon 5DmkII as my main camera body, and I have no experience of high megapixel cameras (well A850 I use for handheld/zoom shooting and it has 24Mpix, but it's just 3Mpix more than 5DmkII).
I could be wrong about this and I understand that the vertical orientation may be worse for vibration. But, I have a hunch that when the L brackets like the RRS are made available for the cameras we will be able to make large strides in controlling the vibration. This may not be ideal and may reduce the speed of operation, but using clamps along with an adjustable arm locked in multiple places (including the L bracket) when used in conjunction with a Bean Bag that we should be able to get some very good to excellent results between 1/160 to at least 1/60 and possibly lower shutter speeds.
I could be wrong about this and I understand that the vertical orientation may be worse for vibration. But, I have a hunch that when the L brackets like the RRS are made available for the cameras we will be able to make large strides in controlling the vibration. This may not be ideal and may reduce the speed of operation, but using clamps along with an adjustable arm locked in multiple places (including the L bracket) when used in conjunction with a Bean Bag that we should be able to get some very good to excellent results between 1/160 to at least 1/60 and possibly lower shutter speeds.
I already tried with generic Novoflex L-bracket in camera and adapter. There was no difference in portrait orientation between using L-bracket OR turning the ballhead 90 degrees to side (I used Benro B4, which is suited for 40kg cameras). At the moment only Metabones EF III adapter has tripod "leg", so all test based to Zeiss APO-Sonnar 2/135 ZE and Leica APO-Elmar 180mm f/2.8 (Leitaxed to EF). The 180 I also tested with lens collar attached Arca-Swiss plate and longer "rail". I didn't have clamps but I tried beanbagging (didn't have beanbags, just sandbags) and adding stuff between Arca-Swiss "rail" and lenses and taping Arca-Swiss "rail" to lens.
After all the effort there it did clearly affect positively to landscape orientation shooting. But on portrait orientation it didn't affect much. Also all these techniques are valid only for situations with infinite time, large tripod with large head with you - if you for example use panohead any of this stuff can't be used (and Gitzo 5 series tripod won't help if the panohead is the weak spot).
People have to understand that 24Mpix vs 36Mpix isn't as enormous difference as it first sounds. A7r has only 22,666% more resolution (for every 100px in A7 there will be 122,666px in A7r) meaning that if you have 1/4 pixel motion blur, you have already lost the resolution advantage A7r offers. For example in panohead test shots A7r (assuming A7 shutter "shock" is equivalent to A7r when using mechanical first curtain) the motion blur is 2-5 pixels(note! A7 larger pixels), while in same conditions A7 (or Canon 5DmkII with live view & EFCS) has zero motion blur.
I already tried with generic Novoflex L-bracket in camera and adapter. There was no difference in portrait orientation between using L-bracket OR turning the ballhead 90 degrees to side (I used Benro B4, which is suited for 40kg cameras). At the moment only Metabones EF III adapter has tripod "leg", so all test based to Zeiss APO-Sonnar 2/135 ZE and Leica APO-Elmar 180mm f/2.8 (Leitaxed to EF). The 180 I also tested with lens collar attached Arca-Swiss plate and longer "rail". I didn't have clamps but I tried beanbagging (didn't have beanbags, just sandbags) and adding stuff between Arca-Swiss "rail" and lenses and taping Arca-Swiss "rail" to lens.
After all the effort there it did clearly affect positively to landscape orientation shooting. But on portrait orientation it didn't affect much. Also all these techniques are valid only for situations with infinite time, large tripod with large head with you - if you for example use panohead any of this stuff can't be used (and Gitzo 5 series tripod won't help if the panohead is the weak spot).
People have to understand that 24Mpix vs 36Mpix isn't as enormous difference as it first sounds. A7r has only 22,666% more resolution (for every 100px in A7 there will be 122,666px in A7r) meaning that if you have 1/4 pixel motion blur, you have already lost the resolution advantage A7r offers. For example in panohead test shots A7r (assuming A7 shutter "shock" is equivalent to A7r when using mechanical first curtain) the motion blur is 2-5 pixels(note! A7 larger pixels), while in same conditions A7 (or Canon 5DmkII with live view & EFCS) has zero motion blur.
I will have to try more experiments with my A7r with the camera particularly in the portrait orientation once I receive my RRS L Bracket and use some of my other equipment.
But as I had posted previously in this thread, I used my A7r with my Novoflex Leica R to NEX adapter and Novoflex ASTAT-NEX rotating collar (no additional weight, bean bag, etc) and my Leica R 100mm f2.8 Apo Macro Adapter for some rather close work at ISO 100 f5.6 and 1/3 second (I was concerned about the leaves moving):
Rich, please keep in mind that I'm not trying to claim that it's impossible to take sharp photo with A7r. Like said in ideal conditions it's for sure possible, and no doubt in certain conditions I would shoot 100% sharp frames. My only point is that it may not be possible for every shot in the field at actual conditions, special emphasis to weakest links like travelling light OR shooting with panohead. AND that in those same conditions one will succeed every time with EFCS-camere, with no effort, any idiot can do it, no need for decade long long lens technique specialization.
Wind, effects to subject or camera/tripod, has no role in this - that is separate topic and affects to all cameras the same way. Also strong wind suits pretty badly to weakest links, like light tripod+head OR panohead.
Samuli
PS. if you get motion blur due to camera shake (for whatever reason) try deconvolution techniques, they do actually work and may improve results so much that bad photo may turn to ok (won't be great thou...)
Even if the A7R is too difficult to control with macro or long telephoto setups, there is still all the rest of photography to benefit from the higher resolution and reduced low-pass filtering. Most of your tree shots could benefit from that, Samuli, I would think. And the two bodies are still small and easy to fit in the bag, easier than a DSLR.
I will do some experimentation this summer, when the leaves are back, to determine if I want to keep my D800 or swap for an A7R.
There is a problem though: I went past a store today, hoping that they might have an early copy of the 55/1.8, and handled the D610 and D800 just for fun, and they felt so good in my hands, so natural, a very big contrast to the A7, which always makes me think, and has my fingers contorted to get everything done. The workflow and ergonomics of the A7 has a very long way to go. I also tried the 5DIII, and while I prefer its grip thickness to the D800, I liked the rest of the ergonomics less, including the place to put my thumb, the controls of course, and the body thickness didn't seem quite right on the palm of my hand. But still much better than the A7. I think I might keep my D800 just as a luxury for the hands.
I also determined that the E-M1 doesn't feel as great as I had hoped, although better than the E-M5, and the G-X7 I didn't really like at all. The shape was just odd. I did like the feeling of the GH3 though.
FWIW, the Crumpler Jackpack 5500 seems like it might be a nice bag for an A7 with a small lens on, and two ZF lenses in the bag, as well as an iPad. I might order one...
carstenw wrote:
Even if the A7R is too difficult to control with macro or long telephoto setups, there is still all the rest of photography to benefit from the higher resolution and reduced low-pass filtering. Most of your tree shots could benefit from that, Samuli, I would think.
Yes, that is what makes it so difficult. In my work I doubt I will ever get any moire issues. If I get human carrying those awful moire stuff (called clothes) into my frame, then I wait until human has left my frame (or then it's just that I don't like people in nature photos...).
carstenw wrote:
And the two bodies are still small and easy to fit in the bag, easier than a DSLR.
Yes, in any case I'll be having soon another A7 (either without or with r). I hope I can get this done before next serious shooting trip - One 5DmkII, two A7(r) and 3 lenses maybe one spare lens - all in flight regulation compatible (under 8kg) backbag like LowePro Flipside 400AW. That is more or less my "dream" setup. 3x A7(r) of course would be even better.
carstenw wrote:
There is a problem though: I went past a store today, hoping that they might have an early copy of the 55/1.8, and handled the D610 and D800 just for fun, and they felt so good in my hands, so natural, a very big contrast to the A7, which always makes me think, and has my fingers contorted to get everything done. The workflow and ergonomics of the A7 has a very long way to go. I also tried the 5DIII, and while I prefer its grip thickness to the D800, I liked the rest of the ergonomics less, including the place to put my thumb, the controls of course, and the body thickness didn't seem quite right on the palm of my hand. But still much better than the A7. I think I might keep my D800 just as a luxury for the hands....Show more → I was actually quite shamed how much sh#t I have given to Canon on past years. After few hours with A7 made me realize how ergonomical Canon's boring "newer nothing new"-cameras actually have been all the time. Luckily I'm tripod shooter, so ergonomics don't really matter.
Back to "on topic", or slightly towards that direction:
Considering different flash sync speed etc. can I be sure when testing A7 with EFCS disabled that the "shutter shock" is similar to A7r? I want to test more before committing to get A7r as well.
I like my Lowepro Flipside 400AW very much as the Backpack that I turn to when I want to carry a reasonable amount of gear on my back. It is comfortable and has a good harness.
Carsten,
If you want a really small but rather spartan bag, I have been using this by Kinesis Gear:
When I want to break up my kit instead of my Backpack (Lowepro Flipside 400AW) or one of my Lowepro AW shoulder bags I often use the Kinesis Gear bag above along with another Kinesis Gear Bag that has been discontinued for some years.
Samuli Vahonen wrote:
Back to "on topic", or slightly towards that direction:
Considering different flash sync speed etc. can I be sure when testing A7 with EFCS disabled that the "shutter shock" is similar to A7r? I want to test more before committing to get A7r as well.
Bring your long lens, adapter, tripod and everything to the store. Ask to borrow an A7R for a few minutes
naturephoto1 wrote:
If you want a really small but rather spartan bag, I have been using this by Kinesis Gear:
I already have several small bags, my favourites of which are the Domke F-3 Super Compact and the Artisan&Artist ACAM-7100, but the thing which grabbed me about this one is that it straps to the waist, yet I think it could hold the A7, a small lens like the FE35, and two of my big ZFs, like the 21 and 85. Maybe even another body. And the iPad. Strapped to my waist, so no shoulder load. I have to try it again...
In that case, isn't the A7 a better alternative over the NEX 7? In addition, the A7 is reported to handle wide-angle rangefinder lenses better. I realize that there is a difference in price and sensor format between the two. I am referring to the A7 as a second/backup body here, BTW although I am thinking too far ahead at this point but hey, it won't hurt, right ?
If you are in the group that would add a NEX 7, you would know it already because of the obvious, the hunger for pixel density
Very often, at long focal lengths, I already crop the image a little, to get the composition/framing right with a prime, or to extend the range of a zoom. Replacing the A7r with the A7 for EFCS would reverse the benefit in this scenario because it has lower pixel density than the A7r, while the NEX 7 adds to the benefit. Also, if wind is the main problem, it is better to use a crop sensor and a shorter lens for general stability. As much as i would like to use a FF sensor for everything, there are still cases where a high pixel density crop sensor will give me some other advantages in trade for the large pixles of FF.
As a general purpose second body the A7 makes a lot of sense. Anyway, as long as I already own a NEX 7, the choice is easy for me in the short term.
The free portion of his article says the problem is only apparent at f/4 and smaller. How could that be possible? The 55 is likely already near its center peak at f/2.8 so why would blur at f/4 be more apparent than at f/2.8?
snapsy wrote:
The free portion of his article says the problem is only apparent at f/4 and smaller. How could that be possible? The 55 is likely already near its center peak at f/2.8 so why would blur at f/4 be more apparent than at f/2.8?
Because of shutter speed. If f/2.8 is 1/100s then f/4 is 1/50s. Fairly basic stuff... Has nothing to do with lens, and all to do with A7r shutter, he got same shutter induced blur with Leica 50 APO @ same shutter speeds.
Samuli Vahonen wrote:
Because of shutter speed. If f/2.8 is 1/100s then f/4 is 1/50s. Fairly basic stuff... Has nothing to do with lens, and all to do with A7r shutter, he got same shutter induced blur with Leica 50 APO @ same shutter speeds.
Samuli
He claims he sees the same issue at that aperture with varying shutter speeds (through the use of ND filters), again implying the issue is unique to that aperture and smaller.
snapsy wrote:
He claims he sees the same issue at that aperture with varying shutter speeds (through the use of ND filters), again implying the issue is unique to that aperture and smaller.
Where (link please)? I could not find from blog OR the actual article any indication of such claim.
"Another confirming diagnosis is to obtain both perfect and impaired results at the same aperture at different shutter speeds; this can be done with a series of ND filters or a continuously variable lighting source (which I don’t have at present). And that is tomorrow’s project, with ND filters. "
I missed the "is to" part so I guess he plans to confirm this tomorrow, the results of which I'm sure will be behind a paywall. Quite a soap opera he has going there.
according to this, the shutter vibration in the A7R is no worse than in the Nikon D3
The problem is that you can lock the mirror up on DSLRs for critical sharpness on a tripod, but you can't do anything to prevent the vibrations with the A7R. Handheld, it doesn't seem to be a big issue.
(or then it's just that I don't like people in nature photos...).
